[ISSUE] /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[ISSUE] /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[cazfi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 750 bytes --]

New issue by cazfi on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959

Description:
### Is this a new report?

Yes

### System Info

Void 6.5.8_1 x86_64-musl

### Package(s) Affected

glibc-devel-2.36_2

### Does a report exist for this bug with the project's home (upstream) and/or another distro?

_No response_

### Expected behaviour

Compiling code that calls basename() works when compiler on C23 mode.

### Actual behaviour

When compiling code that calls basename(char *) under C23 mode, the compile fails as the prototype on /usr/include/string.h does not have any parameters listed.

### Steps to reproduce

1. Have code calling basename() with a proper parameter.
2. Compile it with gcc-13 and -std=c2x

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[sgn]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 221 bytes --]

New comment by sgn on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1784324482

Comment:
```
Void 6.5.8_1 x86_64-musl
Package(s) Affected

glibc-devel-2.36_2
```
??

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[cazfi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 270 bytes --]

New comment by cazfi on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1784557012

Comment:
Yeah, that's likely wrong. It was just what "xlocate /usr/include/string.h" gave, and the form had package as a mandatory field.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[classabbyamp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 229 bytes --]

New comment by classabbyamp on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786354670

Comment:
https://inbox.vuxu.org/musl/6f06bbee-2e89-2ebe-ac18-4541d0696204@huawei.com/T/#u

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[classabbyamp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 294 bytes --]

New comment by classabbyamp on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786354670

Comment:
musl (even current git HEAD) doesn't support C23 yet, I think

https://inbox.vuxu.org/musl/6f06bbee-2e89-2ebe-ac18-4541d0696204@huawei.com/T/#u

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[classabbyamp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 294 bytes --]

New comment by classabbyamp on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786354670

Comment:
musl (even current git HEAD) doesn't support C23 yet, I think

https://inbox.vuxu.org/musl/6f06bbee-2e89-2ebe-ac18-4541d0696204@huawei.com/t/#u

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[classabbyamp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 300 bytes --]

New comment by classabbyamp on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786354670

Comment:
musl (even current git HEAD) doesn't fully support C23 yet, I think

https://inbox.vuxu.org/musl/6f06bbee-2e89-2ebe-ac18-4541d0696204@huawei.com/t/#u

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[classabbyamp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 365 bytes --]

New comment by classabbyamp on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786354670

Comment:
musl (even [current git HEAD](https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/include/string.h#n99)) doesn't fully support C23 yet, I think

https://inbox.vuxu.org/musl/6f06bbee-2e89-2ebe-ac18-4541d0696204@huawei.com/t/#u

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[sgn]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 919 bytes --]

New comment by sgn on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786419379

Comment:
```
The reason for the non-prototype declaration is explained in commit
37bb3cce4598c19288628e675eaf1cda6e96958f:

    omit declaration of basename wrongly interpreted as prototype in C++

    the non-prototype declaration of basename in string.h is an ugly
    compromise to avoid breaking 2 types of broken software:

    1. programs which assume basename is declared in string.h and thus
    would suffer from dangerous pointer-truncation if an implicit
    declaration were used.

    2. programs which include string.h with _GNU_SOURCE defined but then
    declare their own prototype for basename using the incorrect GNU
    signature for the function (which would clash with a correct
    prototype).
```

So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 407 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case, the issue here is that C23 removed support for the original k&r style and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 413 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case, the issue here is that C23 removed support for the original k&r style and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 422 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case, the issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 456 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case, the issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 457 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 697 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 802 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to `#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L`.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 994 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

That is already the case.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to `#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L`.
Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it and as stated musl doesn't support C23 atm. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1037 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to `#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L`.
Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it and as stated musl doesn't support C23 atm. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1042 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` same as C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to `#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L`.
Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it and as stated musl doesn't support C23 atm. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1063 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to `#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L`.
Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it and as stated musl doesn't support C23 atm. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1126 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to:
```
#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L
//Do nothing
#else
//k&r style declaration
#endif
```
Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it and as stated musl doesn't support C23 atm. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1083 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to:
```
#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L
//Do nothing
#else
//k&r style declaration
#endif
```
Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1168 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to:
```
#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L
//Do nothing
#else
//k&r style declaration
#endif
```
Similar to what gcc does for `stdbool.h` (which was also made irrelevant in C23).

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1163 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would be to:
```
#if defined __STDC_VERSION__ && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L
//Do nothing
#else
//k&r style declaration
#endif
```
Similar to what gcc does for `stdbool.h` (which was made irrelevant in C23).

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1188 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would smth like:
```
#if defined(__cplusplus) || (defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
//Do nothing
#else
char *basename();
#endif
```
Similar to what gcc does for `stdbool.h` (which was made irrelevant in C23).

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1169 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) || !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```
Similar to what gcc does for `stdbool.h` (which was made irrelevant in C23).

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1091 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) || !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1091 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`.

The proper workaround here would smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) && !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1159 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`. In C17, this is fine. In C23, they become conflicting declarations.

The proper workaround here would smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) && !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1162 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not this issue.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`. In C17, this is fine. In C23, they become conflicting declarations.

The proper workaround here would be smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) && !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1174 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not the issue in this case.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`. In C17, this is fine. In C23, they become conflicting declarations.

The proper workaround here would be smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) && !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1179 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not specifically the issue here.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`. In C17, this is fine. In C23, they become conflicting declarations.

The proper workaround here would be smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) && !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1242 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not specifically the issue here.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`. In C17, this is fine. In C23, they become conflicting declarations.

The proper workaround here would be smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) && !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be published until earlier next year)
https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/function_declaration

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1258 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1786455944

Comment:
> So, we move `basename` to `#ifdef __cplusplus`?

It would be `#ifndef`, which is already the case and also not specifically the issue here.
The issue here is that C23 removed support for the original pre-ANSI k&r style function declarations/definitions and `int func()` was made from meaning an old k&r style declaration to being equivalent to `int func(void)` just like how it has been in C++.

The idea in musl, is that they declare it using k&r style in `string.h` so that it would be available for glibc compatibility while not breaking applications that re-declare `basename()`, while having the proper definition in `libgen.h`. In C17, this is fine. In C23, they become conflicting declarations.

The proper workaround here would be smth like:
```
#if !defined(__cplusplus) && !(defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ > 201710L)
char *basename();
#endif
```

Although this should probably be dealt with upstream before we patch it. (and the final C23 standard will not be submitted for publication until earlier next year)
https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/function_declaration

Re: [ISSUE] [CLOSED] /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[ahesford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 753 bytes --]

Closed issue by cazfi on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959

Description:
### Is this a new report?

Yes

### System Info

Void 6.5.8_1 x86_64-musl

### Package(s) Affected

glibc-devel-2.36_2

### Does a report exist for this bug with the project's home (upstream) and/or another distro?

_No response_

### Expected behaviour

Compiling code that calls basename() works when compiler on C23 mode.

### Actual behaviour

When compiling code that calls basename(char *) under C23 mode, the compile fails as the prototype on /usr/include/string.h does not have any parameters listed.

### Steps to reproduce

1. Have code calling basename() with a proper parameter.
2. Compile it with gcc-13 and -std=c2x

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[ahesford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 319 bytes --]

New comment by ahesford on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1837299424

Comment:
Given that our currently shipping compiler and musl version don't claim to support (this part of) C23, this seems like expected behavior rather than an actionable bug report.

Re: /usr/include/string.h bad basename() prototype

[oreo639]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 341 bytes --]

New comment by oreo639 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/46959#issuecomment-1904877828

Comment:
This issue was fixed upstream: https://github.com/bminor/musl/commit/725e17ed6dff4d0cd22487bb64470881e86a92e7
The patch has been imported to: https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/45500